Looking at the broader issues here, I know I've had the same sort of problems with the ISO 10303 (STEP) standard [1]. Overall, it consists of dozens of $100+ books, most of which amount to little more than a long list of descriptions of the classes that can be used to transmit CAD data. Everything is in turgid bureaucratese. I've seen nowhere in the standard with any sort of high level description of how those classes are intended to be used, no motivation for why things are the way they are. There are some recommended practices documents, but they mostly seem to cover fringe areas like how to handle colors rather than core areas like the preferred approach for handling CAD geometric data.
It just seems so odd to spend so much effort to develop a public standard, then make it expensive and hard to use. Doesn't that defeat the entire point of having a standard?
It just seems so odd to spend so much effort to develop a public standard, then make it expensive and hard to use. Doesn't that defeat the entire point of having a standard?
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_10303